Skip to main content

Full text of "NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS) 19690028630: Discharge coefficients for thick plate orifices with approach flow perpendicular and inclined to the orifice axis"

See other formats


DISCHARGE COEFFICIENTS FOR 
THICK PLATE ORIFICES WITH 
APPROACH FLOW PERPENDICULAR 
AND INCLINED TO THE ORIFICE AXIS 

by John E. Rohde, Hadley T. Richards, 
and George W. Metger 

Lewis Research Center 
Cleveland, Ohio 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION • WASHINGTON, D. C. • OCTOBER 1969 







DISCHARGE COEFFICIENTS FOR THICK PLATE ORIFICES WITH APPROACH 
FLOW PERPENDICULAR AND INCLINED TO THE ORIFICE AXIS 
by John E. Rohde, Hadley T. Richards, and George W. Metger 

Lewis Research Center 

SUMMARY 

The flow discharged through thick plate orifices with the approaching flow perpen- 
dicular or inclined to the orifice axis was experimentally investigated. The study was 
conducted to determine the influence of the flow and geometric parameters. The param- 
eters investigated were temperature and pressure levels; orifice pressure differential; 
approach Mach number; orifice diameter, thickness, and inlet edge condition; orifice 
surface finish; interference of multiple orifices; and approach passage geometry and 
length. 

The discharge coefficients were correlated with a velocity head parameter which 
consisted of the ratio of the velocity head of the flow through the orifice to the velocity 
head of the flow approaching the orifice axis for various approach Mach numbers. The 
discharge coefficients were found to be dependent on the approach Mach number, the 
static pressure differential across the orifice, the inlet edge radius of the orifice, the 
angle between the approaching flow and the axis of the orifice, and the ratio of the orifice 
thickness to orifice diameter. The effects of temperature and pressure levels, orifice 
surface finish, multiple orifice interference, and approach passage geometry and length 
on discharge coefficients were found to be negligible for the cases considered. 


INTRODUCTION 

Knowledge of the flow through thick plate orifices with the approach velocity perpen- 
dicular or inclined to the orifice axis is required to predict the performance of some 
internally cooled turbine blades and vanes. The need for cooled turbine blades and vanes 
for high performance gas-turbine aircraft engines is well recognized. In order to pro- 
vide cooled blades or vanes that have high heat transfer effectiveness with a minimum 
coolant flow, the internal coolant passages become comparatively complex. Thick plate 


orifice arrangements are employed in the impingement cooling concept wherein a high 
velocity jet of cooling air is directed against the inside surfaces of a blade or vane. 

Thick plate orifices may also be employed in the transfer holes used to supply cooling 
air to the blade or vane leading and trailing edge regions from a radial midchord pas- 
sage. 

Previous studies of orifice discharge coefficients with the approaching flow perpen- 
dicular to the orifice axis are reported in references 1 to 7. References 1 and 2 consid- 
ered perpendicular inlet flow through relatively thin plate orifices and perforated mater- 
ials, reference 3 perpendicular velocity on both the inlet and exit faces of the orifice, 
references 4 to 6 only the perpendicular exit velocity, and reference 7 perpendicular 
inlet velocities to rectangular holes, step louvers, and scoops. 

The basic conclusion of these investigations was that the flow through the orifice is 
influenced significantly by the inlet velocities perpendicular to the orifice axis and that 
for low exit velocities perpendicular to the orifice axis and high jet velocity, the effect 
of exit flow velocity can be eliminated by calculation of a revised exit jet discharge pres- 
sure. 

In thick plate orifices, orifice thickness is an influential variable to the flow. Ref- 
erence 1 indicates the influence of the orifice thickness but the work was primarily con- 
cerned with thin plate orifices. The orifice flow is further influenced by the geometry of 
the main flow duct, geometry of the orifice, the flow conditions, and the proximity of 
other orifices as shown in the thin plate orifice results of references 1, 3, and 7. 

The present investigation considered the following parameters: temperature and 
pressure levels; orifice pressure differential; approach Mach number; orifice diameter, 
thickness, and inlet edge condition; orifice surface finish; interference of multiple ori- 
fices; and approach passage geometry and length. The geometry of the main flow duct 
in all cases but one was a 0. 25-inch (0. 063-cm) diameter tube. This tube diameter was 
repi esentative of a size to be expected in a turbine blade. (The exception was a rectan- 
gulai cross-section main duct to investigate the effect of curvature of the upstream face 
of the orifice.) The orifice thickness varied from 0.06 to 0.25 inch (0.15 to 0.63 cm) 
and the orifice diameters varied from 0. 59 to 0. 128 inch (0. 150 to 0. 325 cm). The inlet 
edge of the orifice was varied from a sharp corner to a 0.030-inch (0. 076-cm) radius. 

The main duct inlet airflow Mach number was varied from 0 to 0. 65. static pressure was 
varied from 20. 0 to 80. 0 psia (13. 8 to 55. 2 N/cm^), and the temperature was varied 
from ambient to approximately 1000° F (811 K). Orifices with axes at 45° and 90° angles 
to the main duct flow were investigated. 


2 



SYMBOLS 


A flow area 

C d discharge coefficient, ratio of measured to ideal flow through the orifice 

D hydraulic diameter of the main duct 

d orifice diameter 

f friction factor 

g gravitational conversion factor 

L linear distance between the pressure tap and orifice 

M Mach number 

p,j, total pressure in the main duct 

p static pressure 

R gas constant for air 

Re Reynolds number 

T static temperature 

T,j, total temperature in the main duct 

t wall thickness 

V velocity 

w measured mass weight of flow 

X entrance length of the main duct 

a inclination angle or the orifice, see fig. 4 

y specific heat ratio 

p density 

Subscripts: 

d main duct 

j jet exit 

o orifice 


APPARATUS 


A schematic diagram of the basic setup utilized for the investigation is shown in 
figure 1„ Air at 125 psig (86.2 N/ cm 2 ) was supplied through a filter and dryer, two pres- 
sure regulators in series, a rotameter, air heater, and into the main duct of the test 
section. Air leaving the main duct and collecting duct (orifice exhaust) was passed 
through throttling valves and cooling coils to an atmospheric exhaust system with the ori- 
fice exhaust passing through an additional rotameter. The air flow rate through the main 
duct and through the orifice and the static pressures in the main duct and orifice duct 
were controlled by adjustments of both the upstream and downstream throttling valves. 

The air heater and dryer and the cooling coils were not in the system during the ambient 
temperature runs. 



Figure 1. - Single orifice model test setup. 


CD-10491-11 


Description of Models 

Orifice geometry variations were obtained by the construction of 12 different models 
The models were made of brass or stainless steel with the main duct or part of the main 
duct formed in halves for the majority of models and joined by soft solder or brazing as 
shown in figure 2. This method of fabrication was employed to allow inspection of the 


4 






A 



CD-10492-11 

Figure 2. - Typical single orifice model showing split construction. 

orifices after final machining and to permit disassembly if necessary. The models were 
drilled, reamed, and polished with conventional machine tools. The orifice diameter and 
edge condition were carefully examined and measured with optical instruments and plug 
gages. Each of the standard models had a nominal upstream duct entrance length of 
3. 5 inches (8. 89 cm) and a diameter of 0. 25 inch (0. 63 cm), resulting in a length to diam- 
eter ratio of 14. This standard X/D of 14 produces fully developed flow for the turbulent 
flow which existed in the main duct of the models. To determine the entrance effect of the 
developing boundary layer, one of the models was constructed so that it could be tested 
with a length to diameter ratio of 2 or 14 depending on the end used as the inlet. This 
model is shown in figure 3. In addition to the models with a circular main duct, one 



Figure 3. - Single orifice model 5 designed for two length to diameter ratios. 


5 


model was constructed of a rectangular duct to determine the effect of main duct curva- 
ture. This same model was modified after initial testing by machining a radius on the 
upstream orifice edge. Inspection of radius and additional testing was then carried out. 
Figure 4 describes model 9, which was the only model with an orifice axis inclined to the 
main stream. The angle a (indicated in the figure) was equal to 45°. 



Figure 4. - Inclined orifice model 9 . 





Section A-A 


CD-10494-11 


Since all of the models described above were carefully made (reamed, lapped, and 
polished) and inspected, it was decided to simulate a production orifice by electrical dis- 
charge machining orifices in a representative number of models. Four duplicate models 

for each of two different sizes (i.e. , a total of eight models) were fabricated by this 
process. 

Table I identifies each of the models considered in this investigation. The table iden- 
tifies the models by number and summarizes the pertinent dimensional characteristic 
associated with each. The accuracy in measuring the orifice diameter was ±0. 0005 inch 
(0. 0013 cm). 


6 



TABLE I - MODEL CONFIGURATIONS INVESTIGATED, 


INCLUDING PERTINENT DIMENSIONS 


Mi Kiel 

Ratio of wall 

Orifice diameter, d 

Wall thickness, t 

Description 

thickness to 
orifice 
diameter , 
t tl 

in. 

cm 

in. 

cm 

l 

- ■ 

0. 51 

0. 1277 

0.3244 

0.065 

0. 165 

Steel 

2 

1.02 

.0635 

. 1613 

.065 

. 165 

Steel 

3 

1.05 

.0630 

. 1600 

.066 

. 168 

Split brass 

4 

1.60 

.0601 

.1526 

.096 

.244 

Split brass 

5 

2.00 

.0630 

. 1600 

. 126 

. 320 

Split brass. X D - 2 or 14 

6 

2.83 

.0660 

. 1676 

. 187 

.475 

Steel 

7 

4.00 

.0618 

.1570 

.247 

.627 

Brass 

8 

1.06 

.0615 

.1562 

.065 

. 165 

Brass, rectangular duct 

9 

1.01 

.066 5 

. 1689 

.067 

.170 

Brass, nr 45° 

a 10 

1, 49 

.0639 

. 1623 

.095 

.241 

Steel, orifice EDM* 5 

a ll 

. 52 

. 1260 

.3200 

.065 

. 165 

Steel, orifice EDM 

12 

1.00 

.0590 

. 1499 

.059 

. 150 

Brass, two orifices in 








tandem 


a Average dimensions. 
^Electrical discharge machined. 


Test Set-Up and Instrumentation 

The basic measurements are shown in figure 1. 

(1) Flow rate at the entrance to the main duct 

(2) Flow rate through the orifice 

(3) Main duct static pressure at a point opposite the orifice 

(4) Static pressure at the exit plane of the orifice 

(5) Total temperature of the supply air 

The main duct static pressure was measured at a point opposite the orifice in most 
cases. This location was selected because it provided a pressure close to the orifice 
inlet. Model 1, Model 2, and Model 12 were instrumented with additional pressure taps 
located up to 1. 75 inches (4.45 cm) upstream of the orifice. These additional taps were 
added to determine any variations in main duct static pressure with flow through the ori- 
fice. The position of the static pressure tap at the exit plane was located in the wall of the 
collecting duct as shown in figure 2 This jet static tap location was selected as close 
to the exit plane of the orifice as feasible and perpendicular to the axis of the orifice . 

The total temperature of the supply air was measured by a thermocouple at the rotameter 
exit when ambient temperature air was used. The heated air total temperature of the 


7 


supply air was measured by a shielded thermocouple approximately 10 inches (25.4 cm) 
upstream of the orifice location. The length of pipe between the heater exit and the ori- 
fice was fully insulated to prevent heat losses. 

A measurement of the main duct total pressure was not attempted because of the size 
limitations in the main duct. The total pressure was calculated based on compressible 
flow relations. 


PROCEDURE 

Experimental 

Three types of tests were made: (1) constant main duct Mach number, (2) all the 
flow passing through the orifice, and (3) constant pressure differential across the orifice. 
In the majority of tests the static pressure in the main duct opposite the orifice was main- 
tained at a value of approximately 40 psia (27.6 N/cm 2 ). 

In the constant main duct Mach number tests, the supply air weight flow and static 

pressure opposite the orifice were maintained constant (constant main duct P ). The 

orifice exit pressure was varied in small increments from the main duct static pressure 
to beyond critical by reducing it to atmospheric. The main duct Mach number was set at 
nominal values of Mach number between zero and 0.55 for this series of tests. 

Tests with all the flow passing through the orifice were made in the same manner as 
the constant Mach number tests except that all the supply air passed through the orifice. 
No supply rotameter was needed, and the main duct exit was closed. The main duct 
static pressure opposite the orifice was maintained constant and the orifice pressure dif- 
ferential was varied as in the constant Mach number runs. 

Constant orifice pressure differential (p d - p^) runs, with a variable main duct Mach 
number, were made on Model 3. In this case, the orifice pressure differential and main 
duct static pressure were maintained at constant values and the approach Mach number 
(and main supply air weight flow) were varied over the maximum range possible. 

In some cases, the models were run by first increasing and then decreasing orifice 
flow. This test procedure was followed in an attempt to detect any hysteresis effect be- 
tween the orifice flow and the orifice pressure differential. None was detected. 


ANALYSIS 

The orifice discharge coefficient is defined as the ratio of the actual flow to ideal 
flow. 


8 



( 1 ) 


The values of the ideal jet velocity and density were determined through the use of the 
following compressible flow relations: 



, 1 2ygRTrp 

r / vy-l/y 

/ Pj \ 

y (y - 1 ) 

\ P T/ 



(2) 


( 3 ) 


The equations utilize the pound- mass and pound-force system of units. 

In the preceding, the jet velocity is limited to sonic velocity. This limit exists 
because the orifice does not contain a divergent section to permit supersonic flow. 

In the calculation of the ideal jet velocity, the main duct total pressure \vas used as 
the total pressure in the jet. The main duct static pressure is a more reasonable value 
of reference pressure for the case of the approach flow perpendicular to the orifice axis 
(no velocity head pressure recovery). However, the use of the main duct total pressure 
as a reference pressure, allows the continuation of the same reference when the orifice 
is inclined (some of the velocity head is recovered). The use of the main duct total pres- 
sure as a reference with the flow perpendicular to the orifice axis gives a slightly higher 
value of ideal jet velocity. 

The main duct total pressure can be determined from the measured static pressure, 
total temperature, and weight flow by an iterative procedure using the following equations 




w 


d 


A d p d 


9 



The measured main duct static pressure opposite the orifice was found to be a function of 
the flow through the orifice for the models containing the larger diameter orifice and the 
two orifices acting in tandem. It was determined that the influence of the orifice flow on 
the main duct static pressure persisted only up to 2 diameters upstream. 

When the static pressure measurement opposite the orifice was influenced by the 
flow through the orifice, the following procedure was employed: The static pressure was 
measured at a point at least 4 main duct diameters upstream of the orifice, where the 
static pressure was not influenced by the flow through the orifice. From this static pres- 
sure a total pressure was calculated upstream of the orifice as discussed previously. 

This total pressure was extrapolated downstream by the adiabatic flow in a constant area 
duct with friction. The following equations from reference 8 were employed for this 
purpose: 


.d (Pd ,. 2Pd ^ + f^ 

Dg V d g 


= 4 log (Re^ Vf ) - 0. 40 

Vf 


s d - »• 


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 


Correlation of Data 


The discharge coefficient data in this report are presented as a function of the ratio 
of velocity head of the orifice jet to the velocity head in the main duct, 

(P,p - Pj)/(Prp - p d ), for constant values of main duct Mach number. This ratio will be 
called " velocity head ratio” in this report. This kind of plot permits correlation of data 
for a wide range of gas temperature levels. The method of data presentation is similar 
to that used in reference 1, except that reference 1 presented data for constant main duct 


10 



velocity. The constant main duct velocity correlation does not hold for a wide range of 
gas temperatures. 

Figure 5 shows a plot of discharge coefficient against the velocity head ratio for 
model 1, the model with the largest diameter orifice (smallest t/d ratio). For this fig 


Main duct 
Mach number, 

M d 

O 0.07 to 0.14 
□ 0.07 

A . 13 

O .25 to 0.27 
C7 .50 

Open symbols denote calculated 
main duct static pressure 
Solid symbols denote measured 
main duct static pressure 


2 4 6 8 10 20 4U ou 

Velocity head ratio, <Pj - Pj)/lPj * p d ) 

Figure 5. - Effect of main duct static pressure determination on calculated discharge coefficients. Model 1; wall thickness 
to orifice diameter ratio, 0.51. 

ure the static pressure in the main duct opposite the orifice was determined by two differ- 
ent methods: (1) it was measured directly, and (2) it was calculated by compressible flow 
friction pressure drop relations and a measured upstream static pressure. In both cases 
the main duct total-pressure was then calculated from the static pressure, total temper- 
ature, and weight flow rate. Figure 5 shows the error introduced by using the measured 
static pressure opposite the orifice (which is influenced by the orifice flow) is small. For 
all the other models (which had smaller orifices), except the model with two orifices in 
parallel (model 12), this pressure correction was insignificant and was not employed. 

Figure 5 shows that the data for various main duct Mach numbers tend to form a com- 
mon curve at lower values of velocity head ratio (usually lower values of orifice flow). 

At the higher values of velocity head ratio separate curves are obtained for each main 
duct Mach number. The upper end of the curves cover the region where the velocity in 
the jet reaches the speed of sound. The flow through an orifice can continue to increase 
after sonic velocity is reached in the jet as explained in reference 9. An orifice first has 
sonic velocity occurring at the vena contracta. Unlike a flow nozzle, the orifice flow with 
sonic velocity at the vena contracta is affected by reductions in the downstream pressure. 
The reduction in the downstream pressure causes the vena contracta to open up and allow 



11 



more flow to pass through the orifice. This opening in the vena contracta continues until 
the jet completely fills the orifice and the orifice chokes the flow. 


Effects of Main Duct Mach Number and Pressure Ratio Across Orifice 

The individual effects of main duct Mach number and pressure ratio across the ori- 
fice are difficult to determine from the correlation shown in figure 5. Because of this 
difficulty, figure 6 is presented to show the discharge coefficient against the main duct 
approach Mach number for a typical configuration and for three different constant orifice 
pressure ratios. The discharge coefficient shown decreases with increased main duct 
Mach number and increases with increased pressure ratio across the orifice. Similar 
trends were noted in the discharge coefficients of all the other models investigated. 



Figure 6. - Effect of main duct Mach number and pressure ratio on orifice 
discharge coefficient. Model 3; wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 

1. 05; main duct static pressure, 38. 7 psia <26. 7 Wcm 2 ). 


12 



Effect of Wall Thickness and Orifice Diameter 

The discharge coefficient is a function of the static pressure at the orifice exit. Con- 
sider the static pressure variation along an ideal vena contraction at the entrance of a 
straight tube with friction. The ideal vena contraction will have a static pressure varia- 
tion which is a function of t/d, and the static pressure variation in the tube is also a 
function of t/d. Therefore, the discharge coefficient will be a function of the t/d ratio. 

The correlation of the data for orifices with a t/d from 1.05 to 4.00 is shown in 
figure 7, and data for t/d = 0. 51 is shown in figure 5. The data in figure 7 correlate in 
the same manner as explained for figure 5. The data points located on the far right of the 
figure and separated from the other data points, represent the discharge coefficient for 
the case where all the flow passes through the orifice. 



Figure 7. - Effects of velocity head ratio and main duct Mach number on orifice discharge coefficient. 


13 





Figure 8 is a composite of data taken from figures 5 and 7 and reference 1 for a main 
duct Mach number of 0. 13 to 0. 14. Similar figures can be constructed for other mam 
duct Mach numbers if desired. The data from this investigation show that at the lower 
velocity head ratios the discharge coefficient increases with increasing t/d ratio for a 
t/d less than 4.00. At the higher values of velocity head ratio, the frictional pressure 
drop starts to reduce the discharge coefficient with increasing t/d ratio. At the lower 
values of velocity head ratio the discharge coefficient curve for t/d = 2. 83 is lower than 
the curve for t/d = 4.00, However, at the higher values of velocity head ratio the above 
discharge coefficient curves cross and the curve for a t/d = 2.83 is higher than the curve 

for a t/d = 4.00. 



However, the results of reference 1 for a t/d less than 0.67, indicate that the dis- 
charge coefficient will decrease with increasing t/d ratio. This variation can be ex- 
plained, if one considers the relative motion of the vena contracta with respect to the ori- 
fice exit plane. In the thin plate orifices the vena contracta or point of minimum static 
pressure occurs downstream of the orifice exit (or pressure tap). As the t/d of the ori- 
fice increases, this vena contracta moves upstream past the orifice exit. With the vena 
contracta located upstream of the orifice exit, some expansion of the jet occurs before 
the orifice exit plane is reached. These variations in vena contracta location, and hence 
the measured exit pressure, produce the variations in with t/d ratio. 

Comparison of the curves for a t/d ratio of 0.51 with the t/d ratio of 0.67 of 
reference 1, indicates that the t/d = 0.67 has a slightly lower discharge coefficient when 


15 








it should have a larger value. This slight variation in discharge coefficient can be attri- 
buted to the fact that the data of reference 1 were taken with a circular orifice in a square 
duct rather than a circular main duct. It will be shown later that the variation in dis- 
charge coefficient from a circular main duct to a rectangular main duct produces this 
same decrease in discharge coefficient. 

Reference 10 showed that the discharge coefficient is dependent on the ratio of orifice 
thickness to diameter when t/d is greater than 0.5 for the case of flow parallel to the 
orifice axis. The variation indicated was that the discharge coefficient increased from 
0.61 with increasing t/d ratios to a maximum of 0. 81 at a t/d of approximately 2 and 
then started to decrease at t/d greater than 2. Figure 8 indicates the same general 
trend for the case of the approach flows perpendicular to the orifice with a maximum 
occurring somewhere near a t/d of 2. 83 for the higher orifice flow (upper end of the 
curve) . 


Effect of the Inlet Edge Condition of the Orifice 

The orifices in the models reported in figures 5 and 7 all contained an initially shaip 
inlet edge. The model reported in figure 9 contained an initially sharp inlet edge orifice 
which was later modified to a 0. 012-inch (0. 030-cm) radius and then to a 0. 030-inch 
(0.076-cm) radius on the inlet edge. 

Figure 10 shows a composite of the three inlet edge conditions at one main duct Mach 
number. This figure shows that a significant increase in discharge coefficient is obtained 
by rounding the inlet edge. The larger inlet radius causes the discharge coefficient to 
increase to as high as 0. 94, nearly the value of a flow nozzle discharge coefficient. The 


1.0 

















Q 


cr 

- 




cy£ 












/ 



r 







7 







— 




ET 



— 



— - 

• 














1 

l 

1 

5 

8 

io .,. 


Cr 



-Q 

g- 


e— Ct 

Hu 

A 

7 ^ 





r i 

Orifice 


— 

inlet radius, 

. — 


in. 

1cm) 


O 

0. 03010.076) 


□ 

.012 

1.030) 


A 

Sharp orifice 


4 0 5 1U 

Velocity head ratio, (Pj - pj)/tPj - p^l 


20 


40 


60 


Figure 10. - Variation of orifice discharge coefficient with orifice inlet radius condition. Wall 
thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 1.06; model 8; main duct Mach numoer, 0. 14. 


17 


increase in the discharge coefficient is caused by a reduction or elimination of the 
separation at the upstream inlet edge . 


Effect of Inclined Orifice Axis 

The orifice axes in the models (figs. 5, 7, and 9) were all perpendicular to the main 
duct flow; for one model, the orifice was placed at a 45° angle to the main duct flow in 
model 9 (shown in fig. 4). Figure 11 shows model 9 and for comparison a band of the 



Figure 11. Effect of inclining orifice axis to main duct axis on discharge coefficient with perpendicular axis model 
included for comparison. Wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 1.01; inclination angle, 45 ; model 9. 


data for model 4 with a t/d ratio 1 . 6 and a = 90°. For model 9 the wall thickness to 
diameter ratio was 1.01, but the orifice bore length on the angle to diameter ratio was 
1.43. The figure shows the significantly higher values of discharge coefficient obtained 
by slanting the orifice relative to the direction of flow in the duct. This increase in flow 
can be attributed to the main stream velocity head, which the orifice "sees" when tilted. 
It should be observed that the discharge coefficient remains fairly constant over a consid- 
erable range of velocity head ratio. 


18 


Effect of Main Duct Wall Curvature 

Figure 12 shows a comparison of data for models 3 and 8. Both have a t/d equal to 





1.0 but model 8 has a 1/2- by 1/4-inch (1.27- by 0.64-cm) rectangular cross-section 
main duct as mentioned previously. Discharge coefficients are consistently higher for 
model 3. The curvature of the orifice surface (acting as convergent inlet) could de- 
crease the turning of the air when passing through the orifice. The decreased turning 
would allow a larger vena contracta to exist. Also, the secondary flow in the rectan- 
gular duct could cause a decrease in the discharge coefficient. 


Pressure Effect 

Orifice discharge coefficients for a range of main duct Mach numbers and static 
pressure p d are plotted in figure 13. The main duct static pressure levels employed 
were 20, 40, 60, and 80 psia (13 . 8, 27.6, 41.4, and 55. 2 N/cm 2 ). The figures show a 
slight variation of the discharge coefficient at the higher pressure. The use of the 80 psia 
pressure level required a variation in the instrumentation which could contribute to the 
slight variation noted. However, even with this slight variation, the lower pressure 
values are adequate for design purposes at higher pressures. This same insensitivity of 
the discharge coefficient to the main duct static pressure was reported in reference 1 at 
low pressure levels 7.4 to 25.0 psia (5.1 to 7.2 N/cm^). 


19 




Discharge coefficient, 





Main duct 

Main duct static 


Mach number. 

pressure, p^, 


M d 

psia (N/cm^l 

□ 

0. 07 

40 

(27.6) 

■ 

.07 

80 

155.2) 

o 

.13 

20 

(13.8) 

A 

.13 

40 

(27.6) 

▲ 

.13 

80 

(55.2) 

Q 

.43 

20 

(13.8) 

V 

.56 

40 

(27.61 

_ J._ 

— 

_ 



(c) Wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 2.00; model 5. 


t 















▲ 







>Sa 


a 

h* 

Q 

sf* 

< to 

to 

■ 

— 

- 

— # 
t 

♦ 





— w 

* 















Main duct 

Main duct static 


Mach number, 

pressure, p d , 


M d 

psia (N/cm^) 

□ 

0.07 

40 

(27.6) 

■ 

.07 

80 

(55.2) 

o 

0. 13 to 0. 16 

20 

(13.8) 

A 

.14 

40 

(27.6) 

▲ 

. 13 to 0. 16 

80 

(55.2) 

0 

.25 

40 

(27.6) 

♦ 

.25 

80 

(55.2) 



4 6 8 10 20 
Velocity head ratio, (Pj - - p d > 

(d) Wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 4.00; model 7. 

Figure 13. - Concluded. 


60 S 




Mam duct Main duct total 
Mach number, temperature, Tr, 
M d °F (K) 

O 0. 16 842 (723J 

□ 0. 15 to 0. 16 505 (536) 

A . 15 Ambient 

• .51 980(800) 

■ .51 505 (536) 

A .51 Ambient 


(a) Wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 0. 51; model 1. 


L_ 1 1 


r i 

Main diirt 

1. 1 1 1 


Mach number, 

temperature, T r , 

-- 

M d 

~'F (K) _| 

□ 

0. 15 

500 (533) 

A 

.15 

Ambient 

■ 

.50 

500(533) 

▲ 

.51 

Ambient “ 





(b) Wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 1. 02; model 2. 







lg 


m 






l 











Main duct Main duct total 
Mach number, temperature, Tj, 


m d 
0. 13 
.14 
.14 
.48 
.47 

0.45 to 0.48 


F (K) 

802 (701) 
508 (538) 
Ambient 
985 (803) 
510(539) 
Ambient 


2 4 6 8 10 20 40 6( 

Velocity head ratio, (Pj - Pj)/(P T - p^) 

(c) Wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, 2.83; model 6. 

Total air temperature effect on discharge coefficient for several main duct Mach numbers. 



Temperature Effect 


Increasing the main gas total temperature from ambient to approximately 1000° F 
(811 K), produced negligible variation in the discharge coefficient as seen in figure 14. 
Figure 14(c) shows a slight decrease in the discharge coefficient for the 800° F (700 K) 
case at a main duct Mach number of 0. 14. This variation in the discharge coefficient 
with temperature could be the result of the increase in the air viscosity. The increase 
in viscosity would cause an increased pressure drop through the orifice for the same 
flow rate. The larger pressure differential would produce a larger ideal flow and a lower 
discharge coefficient. The variation in discharge coefficient due to temperature should 
be indicated on the high orifice flow portion (high velocity head ratio) of the curves through 
long orifices. The data presented in figure 14(c) is for the orifice with the largest t/d 
ratio run with high temperature air. 

The true diameter of the orifice will increase as the tube walls heat up. The true 
orifice diameter will depend on the relative thermal strains throughout the model. The 
maximum possible diameter, which takes into account the variation in air temperature, 
was employed in the calculations. The thermal expansion of the orifice at 1000° F (811 K) 
total temperature, was approximately 0.0005 inch (0.0013 cm) on a 0.060 inch (0. 152 cm) 
diameter. This value is equivalent to half the accuracy of measuring the orifice diameter. 


Entrance Length Effects 


The flow through the orifice with the approaching flow perpendicular to the orifice 
axis, occurs at the tube wall through the boundary layer. Figure 7(c) shows that the 
developing boundary layer has no appreciable influence on the discharge coefficient of an 
orifice after an entrance length of two diameters for an orifice with t/d equal to 2. 00. 
Reference 1 showed this same lack of influence of the boundary layer for orifices of 
t/d ratios of 0. 16 and 0. 32 . 


Effect of an Orifice Surface Finish 

Figure 15 shows the results of testing eight models, four each, of two different t/d 
ratios. Eight models were used to give a fairly large sample size on which to determine 
variations. Comparing model 10 and the data of model 4, which had approximately the 
same t/d of 1 . 5, and comparing model 11 and the uncorrected data of model 1, which 
had approximately the same t/d of 0. 5, indicates that the electrical dischaige machined 
holes are discharging more flow at the higher velocity head ratios and less flow at the 


23 



Figure 15. • Comparison of carefully made with electrical discharge machined orifices. A wall 
thickness to orifice diameter ratio of 1. 49, model 10 is compared with model 4; and a wall 
thickness to orifice diameter ratio of 0. 52, model 11 is compared with model L Main duct 
Mach number, 0. 14. 

lower velocity head ratios. The machining took place from the outside of the tube inward, 
which produced a radius or sometimes a burr on the inlet edge of the orifice (when viewed 
at 30 times magnification). The inlet radius could produce the increased discharge coef- 
ficient and the burr may account for the decrease in discharge coefficient shown. For 
design purposes the above variations can be neglected. 


Orifice Interference Effects 

Figure 16 shows a comparison of discharge coefficients for a single orifice 
t/d = 1 = 05 (model 3) with those of model 12 which had two identical orifices in tandem and 
spaced 1. 5 orifice diameters apart. The data for the tandem orifices were obtained by 
averaging the discharge flow between the two orifices. At this spacing and t/d ratio, 
the interference effects can be considered negligible. 

Method of Data Utilization 

The method utilized to apply the data presented in this report is illustrated in the 
appendix „ 


24 




SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

From this investigation of the discharge coefficient for thick plate orifices with ap- 
proach flow perpendicular or inclined to the orifice axis, the following results were 
obtained: 

1. The main duct approach Mach number, static pressure differential across the 
orifice, the ratio of wall thickness to orifice diameter, and the inlet orifice edge radius 
were the predominant factors affecting the flow through the orifice. 

2. Slanting the orifice axis in the direction of flow significantly increases the dis- 
charge coefficient. 

3. Main duct wall curvature produced a small effect on the discharge coefficient. 

4. The longitudinal interference of multiple orifices is not significant above an ori- 
fice center distance to orifice diameter ratio of 1. 5 for an orifice with a wall thickness 
to orifice diameter ratio of 1. 

5. Main duct air temperature and pressure level, entrance length, and orifice sur- 
face finish produced negligible effects on the discharge coefficient. 

Lewis Research Center, 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 

Cleveland, Ohio, June 26, 1969, 

720-03-00-79-22. 


25 



APPENDIX - METHOD OF DATA UTILIZATION 


The discharge coefficient data presented in this report can be applied to either the 
evaluation or design of turbine blade coolant transfer holes or impingement holes. The 
data can be strictly applied only to the case of a thick plate orifice with the approaching 
flow perpendicular to the orifice axis. However, the results of reference 4 indicates that 
these data can be applied to the case of a thick plate orifice with both inlet and exit 
velocities with certain restrictions. Reference 4 concluded that, for low exit velocities 
perpendicular to the orifice and high jet velocities, the effect of exit flow velocity can be 
eliminated by calculation of a revised exit jet discharge pressure. The revised exit jet 
discharge static pressure is calculated by reducing the flow area of the exit duct passage 
by the width of the jet multiplied by the duct height. The high exit velocity case could 
be approximated by using the data in this report in conjunction with the data of refer- 
ences 5 and 6. The approximation would cover the orifices with a t/d greater than 1.0 
or where the jet is attached on exit. By considering the inlet and exit velocities as two 
independent parameters, the discharge coefficient with the inlet velocity can be obtained 
from the data presented in this report and then corrected for the exit velocity using the 
data presented in references 5 (fig. 7(a)) and 6 (fig. 6(c)). 

The use of curves presented in this report requires that the total and static pres- 
sures in the inlet passage and the exit jet static pressure be known. These values of 
pressure could be obtained by experimental measurements or by calculation in some 
cases, provided the mass flow rates and required flow areas are available. Cases where 
the major portion of the jet velocity head is recovered, as in the leading edge of an 
impingement blade or vane, require experimental measurements of the exit jet static 
pressure. 

The evaluation of the flow through a given turbine blade cooling air transfer hole or 
impingement hole can be accomplished as follows: 

(1) Determine the appropriate curve of discharge coefficient against the velocity 
head ratio based on the existing orifice and main duct geometry. 

(2) Calculate the velocity head ratio (P T - p.)/(P T - p d ), and the approach flow 
Mach number M.. 

(3) Determine the discharge coefficient from the curve selected in (1) at the appro- 
priate values of velocity head ratio and approach flow Mach number. 

(4) Calculate the ideal jet velocity and density using equations (2) and (3), respec- 
tively . 

(5) Determine the actual flow through the orifice from equation (1). 

The design of a given turbine blade transfer hole or impingement hole to pass a 
specified quantity of flow can be accomplished as follows: 


26 



(1) Calculate the velocity head ratio (P^ - Pj)/(P-p - Pfj)> and the approach flow 
Mach number, M^. 

(2) Assume a nominal wall thickness to orifice diameter ratio, for example 1.6. 

(3) Determine the discharge coefficient from the curve of discharge coefficient 
against the velocity head ratio (shown in fig. 8) if the approach flow Mach number is 0. 13 
Figure 5 or 7 must be utilized or a figure similar to figure 8 plotted for the other ap- 
proach flow Mach numbers. 

(4) Calculate the jet velocity and density using equations (2) and (3), respectively. 

(5) Determine the diameter of the orifice required to give the area obtained from 

equation (1). 

(6) Compare this diameter with the t/d ratio selected in step (2) to determine the 
wall thickness. 

(7) If the wall thickness or diameter is unreasonable, select a new t/d ratio and 
return to step (2). 

This design procedure applies only to the cases where the exit jet pressure can be 
calculated. 

The methods presented illustrate the procedure for handling the cases that closely 
simulate the exact model geometries. Corrections to these procedures to account for 
effects like main duct wall curvature, placing the orifice on an angle, and inlet edge 
conditions may be necessary. The wall curvature variation could be extrapolated from 
figure 12 to figures 5 and 7 with reasonable confidence. The /ariation of placing the 
orifice on an angle or the inlet edge condition have such a marked effect on discharge 
coefficient, that its extrapolation to t/d ratios other than 1.0 would be questionable. 


27 



REFERENCES 


1. Dittrich, Ralph T. ; and Graves, Charles C. : Discharge Coefficients for Combustor- 

Liner Air-Entry Holes. I - Circular Holes with Parallel Flow. NACA TN 3663, 
1956. 

2. Stokes, George M. ; Davis, Don D. , Jr. ; and Sellers, Thomas B. : An Experimental 

Study of Porosity Characteristics of Perforated Materials in Normal and Parallel 
Flow. NACA TN 3085, 1954. 

3. Seglem, Clifford E. : The Discharge Coefficient of a Combustor Air Inlet Hole. 

M. S. Thesis, Univ. of Pittsburgh, 1952. 

4. Callaghan, Edmund E. ; and Bowden, Dean T. : Investigation of Flow Coefficient of 

Circular, Square, and Elliptical Orifices at High Pressure Ratios. NACA TN 1947, 
1949. 

5. Dewey, Paul E. : A Preliminary Investigation of Aerodynamic Characteristics of 

Small Inclined Air Outlets at Transonic Mach Numbers. TN 3442, 1955. 

6. Nelson, William J. ; and Dewey, Paul E. : A Transonic Investigation of the Aerody- 

namic Characteristics of Plate- and Bell-Type Outlets for Auxilliary Air. NACA 
RM L52H20, 1952. 

7. Dittrich, Ralph T. : Discharge Coefficients for Combustor-Liner Air-Entry Holes. 

II - Flush Rectangular Holes, Step Louvers, and Scoops. NACA TN 3924, 1958. 

8. Shapiro, Ascher H. : The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid 

Flow. Ronald Press Co. , 1953. 

9. Perry, J. A. , Jr. : Critical Flow Through Sharp-Edged Orifices. Trans. ASME, 

vol. 71, no. 7, Oct. 1949, pp. 757-764. 

10. Lichtarowicz, A.; Duggins, R. K. ; and Markland, E.: Discharge Coefficients for 
Incompressible Non-Cavitating Flow Through Long Orifices. J. Mech. Eng. Sci. . 
vol. 7, no. 2, June 1965, pp. 210-219. 


28 


NASA-1 .aiiKlry. 19B1I 


12 E-5119 




National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
Washington, D. C. 20546 

official business FIRST CLASS MAIL 



POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 
SPACE ADMINISTRATION 


POSTMASTER : [] UndclivcMbJe ( Section 158 

Postal Manual ) Do Not Return 


The aeronautical and space activities of the United States shall be 
conducted so as to contribute ... to the expansion of hitman knowl- 
edge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space. The Administration 
shall provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination 
of information concerning its activities and the results thereof." 

-National Aeronautics and Space Act or 1958 

NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS 


TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific tinj 
technical information considered important, 
complete, and a lasting contribution to existing 
knowledge. 

TECHNICAL NOTES: I n formation less broad 
in scope but nevertheless of importance as a 
contribution to existing knowledge. 

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: 
Information receiving limited distribution 
because of preliminary data, security classifica- 
tion, or other reasons. 

CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Scientific and 
technical information generated under a NASA 
contract or grant and considered an important 
contribution to existing knowledge. 


I ETHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information 
published in a foreign language considered 
to merit NASA distribution in English. 

SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information 
derived from or of value to NASA activities. 
Publications include conference proceedings, 
monographs, data compilations, handbooks, 
sourcebooks, and special bibliographies. 

TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION 
PUBLICATIONS: Information on technology 
used by NASA that may be of particular 
interest in commercial and other non-aerospace 
applications. Publications include Tech Briefs, 

I echnology Utilization Reports and Notes, 
and Technology Surveys. 


Details on the availability of these publications may be obtained from : 

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION DIVISION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

Washington, D.C. 20546